To answer your question, Sometimes it's better to exploit absurdity by being absurb.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt: If your implication is that what Rudy said about Jonathan Pollard is ancient history, you're full of baloney.

The challenges to Giuliani based on his past actions as an executive are as relevant as what Hillary did when she was acting like a tyrant in the White House (Billy Dale & the travel office, Grand Jury testimony that prosecutors didn't believe but couldn't indict her on, etc.). He's got to take the bad with the good about his past, and having gone on record as suggesting the release of an American agent spying for Israel wouldn't be tolerated of a Democrat, either.

Those of us who were warned that the "compassionate conservatism" practiced by then-Governor Bush was more liberal than we were being led to believe feel burned and betrayed. If it weren't for the terrorist attacks that made the war priority number one, Bush's most rock-solid stance would be the opening of the borders to illegal immigrants.

As Jim Robinson said in his controversial thread, this isn't about beating Hillary or Obama, it's about changing the definition of "conservative" for years to come, win or lose; if Giuliani or whoever prevails by being closer to the center than Hillary, Obama, or (ecch) Edwards, it could be curtains for true constructionist jurists in Federal courts from the Supreme Court on down (ever forget that the only reason we have Roberts and Alito today is because Bush made it to a second term and didn't get his wish with Harriet Miers). If he loses, then the message may be the answer is to move further to the center.

Well, for the sake of freeing Pollard, I’d vote for Rudy. But I’d much rather vote for a number of the other current candidates, but to set Pollard free is a meritorious and gracious act, itself alone worthy of my vote.

traitor
Main Entry: trai·tor
Pronunciation: ‘trA-t&r
Function: noun
1 : one who betrays another’s trust or is false to an obligation or duty
2 : one who commits treason

Pollard betrayed a trust. He failed in his duty to protect U.S. secrets, willingly handing them over to Israel. His actions had repercussions, endangering (and costing) lives of Americans, and setting back U.S. intelligence. You may call that “chump change.” I call it traitorous.

Frankly, I don’t care what country it was. Those who would betray their country deserve the harshest of punishment. Your attempt to turn my comments into “hate for Jews” and calling others “blind” is disgusting.

111
posted on 05/07/2007 6:42:58 PM PDT
by calcowgirl
("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)

Frankly, I bet you DO care which country it was. The only disgusting thing, young lady, is for you not to see or acknowledge the Jew hatred that infuses the case.

Let's change Pollard's name. Let's call him Chu Wei, stealing guidance system secrets for China. Or John Smith, stealing sat intel about the region around South Africa for DeBeers -- just to make up a tale. Feel the same way?

Well, you are a hater. Trying to hate two at once too. Hate Guiliani and Pollard. Spics and Jews. Otherwise there’s ZERO to the argument for holding Pollard longer. The facts are that he spied for an an ally, and his time already served — mostly in solitary, iirc — is far harder than ANY comparable case.

EXCERPT April 21, 2007 -- A group of Israelis has launched a grass-roots effort to get people living in the Jewish state who are eligible to vote in the United States to line up behind Rudy Giuliani, it was reported yesterday. The group, Giuliani Supporters in Israel, was launched by Mordechai Twersky, a onetime candidate for state Assembly in The Bronx ...... "I did this as a private personal initiative, as a proud American and Israeli citizen..." Twersky told the NY Post. He said the Giuliani campaign hadn't set up his group, but that he's been in contact with Team Giuliani......Giuliani has historically been popular with Jewish voters, and took a hard pro-Israel line when he was in office........ In some past elections, planeloads of Israelis with American citizenship have flown to the United States to vote.

Rudy is very popular with Jews. So????????

I hope all the GOP candidates are. Jews are activists, and they have money to contribute. The GOP would love to get the Jewish vote.

"Olson had also gained notability by acting as attorney for convicted spy Jonathan Pollard while he was in private practice. Olson had appealed to United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit claiming that during Pollard's trial, the life sentence he received was in violation of the plea bargain agreement, which had specifically taken life off the table. Olson also argued that in violation of said plea bargain, that was grounds for a mistrial. The Court of Appeals, in a panel of three judges, voted 2-1 that no grounds existed for a mistrial. Future Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg cast the deciding vote against Pollard's motion."

I just went back and read some of your posts. Great job defending your position. I think some people also use the term ally when isn’t quite relevant. Technically, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, and a long list of others are our allies. That term can real grey real quick.

126
posted on 05/07/2007 8:08:20 PM PDT
by jedward
(Mission '08 - Take back the House & Senate. No Negotiations...No Prisoners.)

Thanks. There are indeed different levels of allies, but that isn’t my point, really. Whether ally or not, our secrets are our secrets. If the U.S. chooses to share those secrets, that is one thing. Those who choose to help themselves serve heavy consequences—and rightfully so.

Pollard’s actions were traitorous. To call him “chump change” should be an insult to all of those wanting to maintain National Security and sovereignty.

(question: is it j edward or jed ward? I was going to type JE but I remember someone posting to you as JW. I’m so confused!!!! LOL)

134
posted on 05/07/2007 8:20:10 PM PDT
by calcowgirl
("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)

Nope, I was implying and will say outright that if anyone chooses to use the “it was an ally” as a position of defense, they are opening themselves up to the argument of whether that should be a factor or not.

“Or that Egypt is as much of an ally as Israel?”

If someone wants to use the ally position, then they have to defend that very scenario. What does the Department of State declare?

135
posted on 05/07/2007 8:21:19 PM PDT
by jedward
(Mission '08 - Take back the House & Senate. No Negotiations...No Prisoners.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.